"Never mind the fact that the iPod turned the entire music industry on its head. Never mind the fact that most successful notebooks today resemble designs first popularized by Apple. Never mind the fact that the blueprint of the modern day smartphone remains the original iPhone. Never mind the fact that competitors are scrambling wildly to copy the success and design of the iPad. Forget all of these things, because when it comes to Apple, the 'what have you done for me lately?' mentality reigns supreme."

Even that though ignores what we are seeing in the mobile market which is an exact (on fast forward) repeat of what we saw in X86

I think that is a common but completely wrong interpretation of what is happening in the mobile device markets. What is interesting is how different the mobile device markets are and how differently the dynamics of platform performance in the mobile device markets are compared to the PC markets.

In the PC era a Mac was pretty much an equivalent of a Wintel PC when it came to platform utilisation. On both Macs and Wintel PCs people did pretty much the same things, they all ran programs to do similar things and with similar patterns of usage. It was probably true that there was a slightly higher amount of graphic design being done on Macs compared to Wintel PCs but that difference wasn't hugely significant and the difference faded over time. People generally used their Macs as much as people used their Wintel PCs and people generally pretty much did the same sort of stuff on both platforms.

This was very important.

Because is meant that one Mac and one Wintel PC had an equivalent impact and value when it came to platform utilisation. Broadly speaking if twice as many Wintel PCs were sold as Macs then there would be twice as many people buying Wintel PC software, twice as many Wintel PC compatible documents would be produced, twice as many web pages would be surfed using Wintel PC browsers, etc etc. Broadly a Mac was only as valuable as a Wintel PC in the larger PC ecosystem and value chain.

And this this meant that if the ratio of Wintel PCs sold to Macs was ten to one then Wintel PCs would utterly dominate the PC ecosystem and value chain. Macs were marginalised because the money followed the consumers and the Mac ecosystem became less attractive and this in turn drove even more marginalistion.

This is what people think is happening with iOS versus Android. But it isn't.

Mobile device platform utilisation can be measured by these sort of common sense metrics (I have probably missed some)

The most striking thing when one looks at the statistics for these sorts of platform utilisation metrics is how consistently they show iOS significantly out performing Android. It seems that in terms of platform utilisation, and therefore in terms of added value in the ecosystem, one average iOS user is worth several times one average Android user.

This is has very big implications. It means that in order for the Android ecosystem to just reach parity with the iOS ecosystem there needs to be something between four and ten times as many Android devices as iOS devices in the installed base. In order for Android to have a richer and healthier ecosystem than iOS might require Android to achieve an installed base twenty or more times that of iOS.

The mobile device market is not the PC market. The dynamic is completely different and trying to analyse it using concepts and patterns from the PC era will lead to a misunderstanding of what is happening.

The most striking thing when one looks at the statistics for these sorts of platform utilisation metrics is how consistently they show iOS significantly out performing Android. It seems that in terms of platform utilisation, and therefore in terms of added value in the ecosystem, one average iOS user is worth several times one average Android user.

Too simplistic. Such a comparison completely ignores facts like e.g. there are no sub-$100 iPhones -- poor people generally buy cheaper phones and end up spending less money on all sorts of extras, so that immediately drags the average down.

If you wanted a more honest comparison you'd have to compare phone models of similar price and then see how the numbers add up. Then again, this is such an obvious thing that I have a strong feeling of bias on your part.

Too simplistic. Such a comparison completely ignores facts like e.g. there are no sub-$100 iPhones -- poor people generally buy cheaper phones and end up spending less money on all sorts of extras, so that immediately drags the average down.

If you wanted a more honest comparison you'd have to compare phone models of similar price and then see how the numbers add up. Then again, this is such an obvious thing that I have a strong feeling of bias on your part.

I am not sure how your argument counters what I am saying. I was responding to people who say that because Android is outselling iOS it is turning into a repeat of Mac Vs Windows and Android is winning the platform wars just like Windows did by selling more units. I am saying that not all units are equal. It seems that iOS units count more as platforms than Android units.

If it is true that the disparity in platform utilisation between iOS and Android is because a lot of sub-$100 Android phones are being sold then that merely explains the disparity it does change the consequences.

The fact of the matter is that Android is outselling iOS significantly and the Android installed base is now significantly bigger than the iOS installed. Yet the iOS ecosystem is much more healthy, dynamic, and lucrative than the Android ecosystem. Apple makes almost all the profits in the phones business and almost all Android OEMs except for Samsung are barely scrapping by. iOS developers are making more money than Android developers, the same with contents sellers, advertisers, peripheral makers. The iOS ecosystem is healthy, the Android ecosystem is surprisingly anaemic. The 'market share trumps everything' strand of thinking says it should be the other way round.That is the result of the difference in platform utilisation between the two.

Cheap Android phones may explain that phenomena (I personally think that 's only part of the answer BTW) but it does not change it.

Not to mention Werecat that most importantly Google makes their money from datamining so how many apps sell in a particular month? Doesn't affect their bottom line in the slightest. Heck they could afford to just outright buy the developers of the next Angry Birds style hit game and give it away with every Android phone and STILL make insane piles of money because they have the kind of information advertisers LOVE, they have users going from Chrome on their desktops to Android smartphones so they can target those ads like a fricking laser at the consumer.

So for Google you simply can't use the kinds of metric that Apple uses because Google isn't really a software OR a hardware company, they are an AD company so all that really matters to them is not how much Bill and Suzy pay for their smartphones, just that those smartphones are Android.

And I don't know how it is in your area but ever since Walmart (don't know how big Wally World is there but its fricking HUGE here, like McDonald's when it comes to sheer volume) started carrying Android smartphones at ALL price points with their prepaid plans they have just exploded, I mean everybody is using the things now, you just can't get away from 'em. After trying a friend's Samsung that only cost $75 (the unlimited everything plan is only $50 which is dirt cheap here) I can see why and most likely will switch when my plan expires, we're talking unlimited everything including web, a 1GHz with Skype and Wifi for $75?

so as I said there is a REASON why Apple is always having to find new markets because if they don't they find themselves in a race to the bottom which they don't want any part of. If the rumors are true and the next "big thing" Cook is gonna unveil is gonna be a watch? Yeah i don't think that one will fly off the shelves. But as a retailer I can tell you that when products get "good enough" it quickly becomes price above all and I'd say we are there when it comes to phones and tablets.